Posted on 04/08/2018 8:41:12 AM PDT by rktman
American Muslim leaders and policy analysts say that such a move could be used to target Muslim groups and nonprofits -- even those that work to protect civil rights and the victims of hate crimes. Anti-Islam groups like ACT for America and the Center for Security Policy characterize many of the largest American Muslim organizations as “fronts” for the Muslim Brotherhood. But most mainstream experts on American Muslims say that any such connections are so tenuous or old as to be irrelevant, and that the effort to classify them as terrorist affiliates amounts to modern-day McCarthyism
(Excerpt) Read more at newsbusters.org ...
Fake hate crimes... all from links below:
A man on Friday was arrested on a felony charge of obstruction of justice and a misdemeanor charge of harassment. Azhar Hussain, an assistant professor at Indiana State University, allegedly falsified claims of anti-Islamic threats. He even reported an attack that never happened, police said.
Earlier this month, an African American man pled guilty to posing as a white supremacist and “mailing threatening communications” to other minority residents in Knoxville, according to authorities. Justin Lamar Coleman was charged with mailing six hostile letters describing violent and disturbing acts to local African Americans from last July through December.
Can we solve America’s fake news problem? A media expert’s advice
These incidents are indicative of a larger problem - false reports can waste time and valuable resources, while detracting from the legitimacy of real hate crimes.
http://www.kcci.com/article/are-fake-hate-crimes-on-the-rise/9544819
A black student wrote those racist messages that shook the Air Force Academy, school says
fake hate crimes: a database of hate crime hoaxes in the usa
http://www.fakehatecrimes.org/
Hmmm. It’s almost like they’re losing any credibility they had. LOL! Yeah, credibility. Pffftttt!
The Islamophobiaphobic ... helping the Muslim Brotherhood etc by suppressing knowledge about Islam.
It is not just the Muslim Brotherhood but organizations like the Council of American Islamic Relations, CAIR and the Nation of Islam which need to be scrutinized. I know many folks from work and the communities I have lived in who follow the Muslim faith but want nothing what so ever to do with these organizations.
In his Red Bill Briefing, other presentations too, Stephen Coughlin makes a point of the fact that the OIC and many other Muslim groups use a lexicon where words and phrases are defined by Sharia. When some Muslim group says they support civil rights they don’t have to say “according to Sharia” because it is implicit, not just that it is something that various parent organizations have put the world on legal notice about.
That’s why having an “old” connection to the Muslim Brotherhood is relevant. The sort of soil tells you what can grow out of it.
“Tenuous or old” = replaced with a layer of ‘cut-out’ front groups
Scratch a Muslim - find a Jihad Warrior, set on hair trigger, with absolutely minimal pressure necessary to activate.
Time bombs in our midst. Which look just like the harmless duds surrounding them on all sides.
And you cannot tell which is which, from external observation.
When are the Chinese going to make their rewritten version of the Koran available to the world?
This the “etc”.
One of the points, since I mentioned him in a subsequent post to the one you responded to, that Coughlin makes is that he and others don’t have to prove that the Islam of the “militants” is or isn’t the real Islam, but only that their teachings, doctrines, and books are the ones sold in Mosque bookstores and used by Muslims, that they have a lot of clout backing them.
So when a Muslim says they don’t like these organizations that’s not a bad thing; however, if they are Sunni Muslims (Shiite and others will have their own authorative books obviously) the same books that the Muslim Brotherhood etc uses are almost certainly the materials their Mosque uses and sells.
Even discounting that all Muslims use the Koran, that means that not opening a book considered authoritative by your bunch may be all that stands from some Muslims deciding the Koran really says that and becoming some level of jihadi.
McCarthy was spot on on many of his targets
All the left can do to deflect reality is to call names
Aside: of the many shameful events in European history when Britian and France teamed up with the Ottomans to wage war against a Christian Russia has to rank fairly high.
It is McCarthyism. It is totally unfair to generalize from a few tens of thousands of Islamic terrorist attacks over the past two decades, and the billion or so Muslims who celebrate those mass murders, to all of Islam. We have to keep in mind that there are dozens of good, peaceful Muslims who oppose violent jihad.
With numbers like that, I guess an apology is in order then. ;-)
LOL - good point.
The NYT claiming “McCarthyism” simply means organizations such as ACT and millions of non-Muslims around the word are correct to be concerned about Islamic violence because history has shown Joseph McCarthy was entirely correct.
Right?
RIGHT?
LOL! Yeah, it’s like a “Buehler? Buehler?” moment.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.